Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!

Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Just curious how you guys are liking the MT. I decided to go with the CVT for a few reasons. The two main reasons being my wife isn't very experienced with manuals and the second being that the MT didn't feel right to me. I learned to drive a manual in 2000 and started driving one full time in 2002 until I traded my car in for my new impreza. For whatever reason I had a really hard time telling what was going on with the clutch in the impreza. I couldn't feel it engaging or something. My old car was a VW and I also test drove the ford focus with a manual and both cars felt natural to me. Have you guys learned to feel comfortable with the MT in the impreza or did it feel right to you right from the start?

Love our MT Sport. Have test driven a CVT Impreza since and very happy I went with the MT. I also commute in traffic with MT with no issues. Clutch feels fine to me. It isn't a S2000 transmission, but it isn't meant to be.

I love it. This is my 11th manual transmission vehicle and it's one of the easiest I've had. I really like that the drivetrain is set up longitudinally so the shifter is more directly linked into the transmission. The drivetrain set up really sets it apart from the other econo cars.

I also like that the AWD is 50/50, don't need to wait for slipping, you have 50/50 AWD right off the bat.

if this car was a wrx I'd be a little more concerned about this aspect but given how little power we are putting down to the wheels anyway I'm not too worried about it.

Well, I Iive in Minnesota, where you don't need 300 hp to have traction issues. I'm sure the CVT system works fine, but I like mechanical simplicity and proactive nature of the 50/50 viscous center diff setup. Even in dry conditions, all 4 wheels share engine braking/acceleration duties whereas the CVT's front tires carry almost all of the burden.

I like my MT just fine. We were thinking about the CVT because my wife doesn't like driving manual, but 95% of the time she drives her own car.

I have no regrets. The manual was cheaper and I trust manual transmissions to be more reliable and to be cheaper to fix if/when they break. I also relish the feeling of control the manual gives. The Impreza is not a sports car but it is still fun to drive with a stick.

I do agree that the MT in the Impreza is a little bit "vague" in that it's not as obvious when the clutch is starting to catch as in some other cars. But I got used to it after a couple of days.

I like my MT just fine. We were thinking about the CVT because my wife doesn't like driving manual, but 95% of the time she drives her own car.

I have no regrets. The manual was cheaper and I trust manual transmissions to be more reliable and to be cheaper to fix if/when they break. I also relish the feeling of control the manual gives. The Impreza is not a sports car but it is still fun to drive with a stick.

I do agree that the MT in the Impreza is a little bit "vague" in that it's not as obvious when the clutch is starting to catch as in some other cars. But I got used to it after a couple of days.

Almost the same for me, except I need to teach the wife how to drive MT first. I agree with you on the rest of the points you made as well. Specifically about control and ease of repair.

I've been reading that the stock shifter is a bit "rubbery" feeling, but that can be fixed with a cobb, kartboy, or perrin shifter.

I plan on installing a kartboy or perrin after a few months. I'm leaning towards the Perrin, simply because it's a lot cheaper, but I'll pay for quality.

Well, I Iive in Minnesota, where you don't need 300 hp to have traction issues. I'm sure the CVT system works fine, but I like mechanical simplicity and proactive nature of the 50/50 viscous center diff setup. Even in dry conditions, all 4 wheels share engine braking/acceleration duties whereas the CVT's front tires carry almost all of the burden.

So under normal driving conditions (not bad weather) how can you even tell the difference? From test driving both manual and CVT imprezas I can't even tell it's an AWD vehicle so I would def have a hard time differentiating the different types of AWD systems they have.

What will the difference in performance be with bad driving conditions? Both systems appear to be able to direct the power where it's needed. I wonder if one of those bluetooth OBD II scanners can read what the CVT transmission is doing (since it is electronic after all).

I didn't start this thread as a war between which transmission people choose. I started it to see if other people noticed some slight weirdness with the 5MT on this car and if yes if they've grown accustomed to it and are happy with the car.

So under normal driving conditions (not bad weather) how can you even tell the difference? From test driving both manual and CVT imprezas I can't even tell it's an AWD vehicle so I would def have a hard time differentiating the different types of AWD systems they have.

What will the difference in performance be with bad driving conditions? Both systems appear to be able to direct the power where it's needed. I wonder if one of those bluetooth OBD II scanners can read what the CVT transmission is doing (since it is electronic after all).

I didn't start this thread as a war between which transmission people choose. I started it to see if other people noticed some slight weirdness with the 5MT on this car and if yes if they've grown accustomed to it and are happy with the car.

I never drove the CVT, so I don't know if I would be able to tell the difference in dry conditions, all I know is that the front tires are doing less work with manual transmission equipped Imprezas. There is a finite amount of traction available from the front tires, they handle the majority if the steering duties, and with the CVT, the majority of the engine braking/acceleration duties as well. In a corner, with the front tires loaded (car is in gear), the threshold where the front tires break loose and the car starts to understeer should be lower with the CVT vs the manual.

With snow on the ground, the 50/50 system doesn't have to think about anything, it just does it.

As far as any weirdness with the manual/clutch, I haven't noticed any.

I never drove the CVT, so I don't know if I would be able to tell the difference in dry conditions, all I know is that the front tires are doing less work with manual transmission equipped Imprezas. There is a finite amount of traction available from the front tires, they handle the majority if the steering duties, and with the CVT, the majority of the engine braking/acceleration duties as well. In a corner, with the front tires loaded (car is in gear), the threshold where the front tires break loose and the car starts to understeer should be lower with the CVT vs the manual.

With snow on the ground, the 50/50 system doesn't have to think about anything, it just does it.

I think you are mistaken on the understreer. Everything I have read on this describes the continuous AWD system (what the 5MT has) as "reactive", as in something has started to give and the system reacts. The "active AWD" system that the CVT has is described as "pro-active" in that it redirects power before there is a problem. Given this I don't see why understeer is more likely unless they've tuned the system to create this effect. I've seen numbers on how the active AWD system is split under normal/nominal conditions range from 90/10 (granted this source said highway which I'm not sure if this matters to the system or not) to 60/40. Since the system is pro-active however when the proverbial fecal matter hits the fan I'd expect the system to do whatever it takes just like the reactive 5MT system would - in other words, understeer into the ditch avoided!

I think you are mistaken on the understreer. Everything I have read on this describes the continuous AWD system (what the 5MT has) as "reactive", as in something has started to give and the system reacts. The "active AWD" system that the CVT has is described as "pro-active" in that it redirects power before there is a problem. Given this I don't see why understeer is more likely unless they've tuned the system to create this effect. I've seen numbers on how the active AWD system is split under normal/nominal conditions range from 90/10 (granted this source said highway which I'm not sure if this matters to the system or not) to 60/40. Since the system is pro-active however when the proverbial fecal matter hits the fan I'd expect the system to do whatever it takes just like the reactive 5MT system would - in other words, understeer into the ditch avoided!

The manual transmission system is proactive in the sense that by default power is being transmitted to both front and rear equally.

How can any system predict a loss of traction before it happens? If the Subaru CVT system is that smart, I'm bringing it to Vegas in January for the Super Bowl.

The manual transmission system is proactive in the sense that by default power is being transmitted to both front and rear equally.

How can any system predict a loss of traction before it happens? If the Subaru CVT system is that smart, I'm bringing it to Vegas in January for the Super Bowl.

50/50 front and rear isn't always the right ratio depending on the conditions so I'm not sure what you mean. It might make a good starting point if you are dealing with a reactive system though b/c it's in the middle of the range that you have to work over.

If I knew how that worked I would have invented it before Subaru did If I were to guess however they could sense wheel speeds and/or use sensors (gyros, accelerometers, etc.) to see the loss of traction coming and adjust accordingly. It's not that far fetched.

50/50 front and rear isn't always the right ratio depending on the conditions so I'm not sure what you mean. It might make a good starting point if you are dealing with a reactive system though b/c it's in the middle of the range that you have to work over.

If I knew how that worked I would have invented it before Subaru did If I were to guess however they could sense wheel speeds and/or use sensors (gyros, accelerometers, etc.) to see the loss of traction coming and adjust accordingly. It's not that far fetched.

When it snows here, it snows fairly uniformly. The whole road is covered in snow. If we're both sitting at a stoplight, I have all 4 tires' traction right away. Your car doesn't know there is snow on the ground. Mine doesn't need to know. Your car waits for input from wheel speed and throttle position sensors and reacts to that input, but there is no input until you start moving.

Subaru Outback owners with more experience in both manual and the Auto versions of AWD (manual is viscous coupling, Auto/CVT use electronic clutches) found that both were great, but the Auto was slightly better because the system responded quicker to changes in traction.

This makes sense because the viscous coupling fluid has to heat up to begin transferring more power, which takes longer.

Personally I like having the simpler viscous coupling AWD and the manual transmission because they are proven for longevity and cheaper to maintain and replace.

I also like controlling the gears myself, and don't find the clutch or hill assist to be bad.

Of course it shifts a lot more smoothly when you change the differential fluid to Amsoil Severe Gear, at least that was my experience.

Subaru Outback owners with more experience in both manual and the Auto versions of AWD (manual is viscous coupling, Auto/CVT use electronic clutches) found that both were great, but the Auto was slightly better because the system responded quicker to changes in traction.

The shifts seem a little longer than in my 2006 impreza 2.5i. Personally I hate the hill holder system. I disabled it and it felt wonderful but I hate the yellow light that stays in the dashboard so I put the hill assist back on. The yellow light ruins the nice red display at night.

The shifts seem a little longer than in my 2006 impreza 2.5i. Personally I hate the hill holder system. I disabled it and it felt wonderful but I hate the yellow light that stays in the dashboard so I put the hill assist back on. The yellow light ruins the nice red display at night.

yes i'm coming to terms with the yellow light! For now I'll do the BET mod to take care of that. Whenever I have the dash open I'll get a little more advanced.

Well, I don't own this car (yet), but I've driven both a bunch. My 2 cents, and I've driven manuals all my life (25+ years of driving).

I love manuals but I am unimpressed with this manual. For starters, there feels like there's too much distance between the gearing, so there's a big drop in RPM between gears. First gear is too touchy & jerky. The shifter feels sloppy.

Now I will admit a bias, as I've become spoiled from years of driving Miatas. But even my old B-series truck had a smoother shifting action than this gearbox. What it feels to me is cheap, as in cheaply made.

I have been waiting for the 2013's as I wanted a leather wheel and shifter, but I'm either going to have to reconsider the CVT or skip this iteration altogether.